Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges
Acts
  • Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges
Acts
  • Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

    SAYYIDALI V.T. v. STATE OF KERALA

    1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

    2. The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No.191 of 2018 of the Manjeri Police Station registered under Sections 117, 120(b), 228A, 143, 147, 283, 353, 117 r/w Section 149 of the IPC and under Section 4(1) and (6) of the Kerala Public Ways (Restriction of Assemblies and Processions) Act, 2011 and under Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

    3. On 16.4.2018, an unprecedented incident took place in the northern part of Kerala. A call for hartal was made through the medium of Whatsapp and the Internet for protesting against the unfortunate death of a minor girl in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The message was inflammatory and was allegedly made to cause feelings of hatred between the religious communities in the State. Large number of persons assembled B.A.No.3339/2018 2 in the streets from nowhere and created mayhem. The police were jolted into action. Prohibitory orders had to be issued to bring the situation under control. In numerous places, antisocial elements took law into their own hands and created mischief. When police intervened, their orders were ignored and they were deterred from discharging their official duty. The subject crime is also one of those Crimes which took place on 16.4.2018.

    4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

    5. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant very fervently submitted that the applicant has been roped in without a cause. The allegation against him is trivial is the submission.

    6. The learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand very strenuously opposed the prayer. It is submitted that the applicant along with others had formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object blocked the road and assaulted the police men and deterred them from discharging their official duties.

    7. I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the case diary. It appears from the materials that B.A.No.3339/2018 3 hartal was declared on 16.4.2018 by unseen persons in a secretive manner by abusing the awesome power of technology. Hateful messages were spread through facebook exhorting like-minded people to come out in protest. All these incidents took place in the communally sensitive area in the northern part of Kerala. The investigating agency have obtained materials which have led to the conclusion that the whole incident was engineered for triggering communal strife and tension and to create enmity between two groups on the grounds of religion.

    8. Having considered all the relevant aspects, I am not persuaded to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. I direct the applicant to surrender before the investigating officer or the court having jurisdiction. If an application for bail is preferred, the same shall be considered and orders shall be passed on its merits. This application will stand dismissed. Sd/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE al/- //True Copy\\ P.A to Judge

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    SAYYIDALI V.T. v. STATE OF KERALA
    (May 28, 2018)